Shelby Lyman
Number of games in database: 18
Years covered: 1954 to 1979
Last FIDE rating: 2260
Overall record: +11 -6 =1 (63.9%)* * Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games
Based on games in the database; may be incomplete.

His daily (6 times/week) puzzle is a regular feature to a Canadian newspaper, the National Post, as well as the Boston Globe, Miami Herald, St. Petersburg Times West Palm Beach, Tallahassee Democrat, Sarasota Herald Tribune, Houston Chronicle, Boston Democrat, Boston Globe and San Francisco Chronicle, among others. Harry Lyman is his uncle.

Caissanist: Buried in the classified ads section of the San Francisco Chronicle is a daily chess column written by Lyman (the country's only daily chess column, so far as I know). Each column includes a puzzle, generally about as hard as a Monday or Tuesday Chessgames puzzle.

collodi: The chess puzzle, without the column, also runs daily in the Boston Globe. Remember the days when Lyman moderated the world chess championships of the 70's + 80's live on national television? Will we ever see such coverage in the USA again?

randallbsmith: As to Lyman -- I too try to do his puzzle in the SF Chronicle ... anyone know if he maintains a web page (or at least an e-mail address)? Informal googling lead me nowhere ... It would be fun if there was a comment feature like we have here at chessgames.com for Lyman's puzzles.

neveramaster: I remember during Karpov-Korchnoi 78, all the panelists were sure Korchnoi had a won game, and Shelby says "we don't have Karpov's next move, Karpov resigned". Then in the background, it is stated that Korchnoi resigned. Shelby looks embarrassed, but he quickly figures out the mating net that Karpov had spun.

Tessie Tura: In today’s SF Chronicle, Lyman wrote a nice little reminiscence about playing skittles at the Boylston Chess Club in the Fifties. Here’s an excerpt:

“ There were no timers or chess clocks in view for casual, everyday use. One trusted the opponent to play at a reasonable speed without them. If a club member faulted in that regard, he was avoided as a future opponent. Or if really annoyed, a prolonged exit by his aggrieved partner to the men’s room was a suitable punishment. One could also resign in an obviously overwhelming position. Only the most obtuse would enjoy such a victory.”

nullmuse: I have just discovered that Shelby Lyman's "On Chess" column runs each Saturday in The Columbus Dispatch. This is the third week I've been looking forward to reading it.

I also cannot find anyway to contact him directly. Most columnists now publish an e-mail address in their byline for feedback.

In the first column of his I read, I noticed he had failed to catch an easy and obvious escape for the king that allowed black to create a stalemate instead of white forcing a checkmate.

In TODAY'S "Beginner's Corner" puzzle ("First title match, from 19th century, far from glitzy" 17Jan2009) the "Beginner's Corner" puzzle is "White moves, white forces checkmate"--there's no white king in the diagram!

Logically, White King would be on G1, but lacking the King altogether definitely influences how one would solve the puzzle!

edjsch: I've been reading Shelby's column for maybe 30 years (it must have started shortly after he hosted the Fischer - Spassky match on PBS), and I don't reacall any errors on his puzzle. (Usually it's I who missed something!). But, you are correct, last week's puzzle indeed was missing the white king! Must have been a "typo" in the graphic. I emailed my local paper, Newsday, but they did not reply. Apparently Mr. Lyman doesn't do email! (Anyone have an email address for him?)

In this weeks column (1/20/2009) it looks like there's another error to "Black mates in 2". Correct me if I'm wrong, but Black can mate in 1. There's no need for the Rook to take the Knight on E1 before the Queen moves to D3. The Queen can simply move to D3 on the first move because the Knight is pinned and cannot take the Queen. Did I miss something?

geezer2: National Post (Canada) has problem May 29 2010: Black is to play but does not check or begin a mating sequence. (Lyman's hint is "Win at least a pawn"). His solution assumes a defensive King response whereas a rook check is available.
I'd post the position but I don't know how.

What are we to think of the strikingly anti-elitist 1926 declaration by Emanuel Lasker, who reigned as world chess champion for almost 27 years?

"Take any boy," he said, "any boy fairly intelligent and fairly healthy, and you can make a chess prodigy of him - or any other sort of prodigy."

In more recent years, a similar point of view was expounded by Hungarian pedagogue Laszlo Polgar: Let children follow their natural interests, he said, and their possibilities are unlimited.

An astonishing result is the achievement of his three daughters, the chess-playing Polgar sisters: Judit, for years ranked among the top 10 in the world; Susan, a former women's world champion; and Sofia, an International Master.

My view is that Lasker and Polgar describe an essential of achievement but fail to encompass the sometimes critical role of DNA or genius.

I can think of several children whom I've observed who immediately towered among their peers. Their innate grasp of the game was astonishing.

The inimitable precociousness of Paul Morphy, Jose Capablanca and Samuel Reshevsky, among others, reminds us that genius - though rare - is a real phenomenon.>

I'll be adding 3 more of his from <2nd Pan-American, Hollywood (1954)> soon.

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply.
Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous,
and 100% free--plus, it
entitles you to features otherwise unavailable.
Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should
login now.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.

No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.

No personal attacks against other members.

Nothing in violation of United States law.

No posting personal information of members.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page.
This forum is for this specific player and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or
this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages
posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.